Common Sense & "Sniper" Rifles
- Thread starter sholling
- Start date
Our friend Socrates has been getting delusional lately with his no commercial ammo is to be trusted rant and now common sense is outdated. I respect the man but no good can come from referring to our precision rifles as sniper rifles as any thoughtful person would know. Congress could easily ban them as unnecessary for self defense and our own sniper label would be used against us. Go ahead and get cocky. He's also delusional about out rights being secure due to Heller. We won that by a 5-4 squeaker of a ruling with Kennedy just barely going along. Scalia is 72 years old and will likely retire during an Obama presidency. If you think his replacement will be to the right of Ginsberg then you are dreaming. Such a court will narrow Heller into meaninglessness if we get cocky. But yes you do have the right to shoot your rights in the foot. I guess common sense is outdated. Feel free to blaze away.
MisterWilson
New member
Whether congress banned them or Anti's used the phrase against us, it would happen regardless of what we would call them.
I think I'm more in Socrates' corner on this one. To me, "sniper rifle" does have a certain connotation which is different than either a target rifle, a varmint rifle, or a bench rest rifle. It carries a connotation that it is for military or police use against a human target.
Now, the question is whether it is legitimate for a person to have a rifle with that purpose in mind. I believe it is perfectly legitimate to do so. Many people in this country still live in areas where such rifles make sense as a defense weapon. When somebody says "sniper rifle" to me, it is simply a short hand method of referring to a certain type of rifle to be used in a certain situation.
And in the interests of full disclosure, I do not own a sniper rifle. I don't even own a rifle with optics, but I think it is perfectly fine for someone else to do and not worry about political correctness.
Now, the question is whether it is legitimate for a person to have a rifle with that purpose in mind. I believe it is perfectly legitimate to do so. Many people in this country still live in areas where such rifles make sense as a defense weapon. When somebody says "sniper rifle" to me, it is simply a short hand method of referring to a certain type of rifle to be used in a certain situation.
And in the interests of full disclosure, I do not own a sniper rifle. I don't even own a rifle with optics, but I think it is perfectly fine for someone else to do and not worry about political correctness.
First off, if someone is actually building a 'sniper rifle', it brings to mind a couple things: first a model built after a current production police 'sniper rifle', or, a model built like the military 'sniper rifle'(s). Perhaps that's why I was not really on the PC bandwagon on this one. I've got retired SWAT friends that actually have/had sniper rifles, and, they were generally .308 Remington. I should call him today...
Also, it doesn't preclude the fact that the OP might actually BE a police officer, wanting to build a rifle similar to his departments' rifles.
The poster in question could also be an anti-gun person, who has only 7 posts, and, is intentionally planting that post here, for future events. We don't know.
If nothing else, this post, for that reason, should be brought to the attention of the moderators.
While Sholling is correct, that 'sniper' is generally a term used to refer to someone shooting humans, that doesn't mean the rifle is incapable of killing groundhogs.
Unless Sholling knows something about Scalia I don't, I doubt he'll EVER retire. It also makes me feel very old, because I thought of him as a young buck...
Anyway, one of the serious signs of Kalifornication is the almost military like pessimism that things might be going our way. After being in Kali for so long, it affects your thought process, loss of freedom, constant bad law results become so common you can't believe things might actually have been getting better. It builds a kind of hopeless feeling, and, becomes a bit of a self-fulfilling prophecy. I suffer from this, so I'm familiar with it.
An excellent example is believing that Obama is going to be our next president. I just can't get behind that one, for a variety of reasons....
Sholling brings up a pretty good point: at this juncture, the president is important mainly for appointments for the court. In the next term, you be the judge of who is most likely to retire:
John Paul Stevens Born April 20, 1920 (1920-04-20) (age 88)
John Glover Roberts, Jr. January 27, 1955 (1955-01-27) (age 53)
Antonin Gregory Scalia
Born March 11, 1936 (1936-03-11) (age 72)
Anthony McLeod Kennedy
Born July 23, 1936 (1936-07-23) (age 71)
David Hackett Souter
Born September 17, 1939 (1939-09-17) (age 68)
Clarence Thomas
Born June 23, 1948 (1948-06-23) (age 60)
Ruth Bader Ginsburg
Born March 15, 1933 (1933-03-15) (age 75)
Stephen Gerald Breyer
Born August 15, 1938 (1938-08-15) (age 69)
San Francisco, California figures
Samuel Anthony Alito
Born April 1, 1950 (1950-04-01) (age 58)
SCALIA, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which ROBERTS,
C. J., and KENNEDY, THOMAS, and ALITO, JJ., joined. STEVENS, J., filed a
dissenting opinion, in which SOUTER, GINSBURG, and BREYER, JJ.,
joined. BREYER, J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which STEVENS,
SOUTER, and GINSBURG, JJ., joined.
Barring acts of God, we have never looked so good on the court, other then The Four Horsemen.
I also have great respect for Sholling, though I do like to have a bit of fun, once in awhile...
BTW I own precision rifles. I'm all for owning precision rifles that will dewing a fly at hundreds of yards (I'm not close to that good a shot ). Heck I plan to buy even more precision rifles and/or varmint rifles and/or 'tactical type' rifles. I may even seek advice on the subject. I just would never come here and ask for help picking out a "sniper rifle" because I'm not a sniper and I'm not planning on doing any sniping.
I also think that anyone that's noticed that the latest attempt at bringing back an even more draconian assault weapons ban is a bipartisan effort in congress would be getting nervous. Well that and the fact that Obama could become friendly with a chicken on the steps of congress and all we'd hear from the media was that it was a yet another sign of his "inclusiveness" and yet another reason to vote for the his Messiahness.
). Heck I plan to buy even more precision rifles and/or varmint rifles and/or 'tactical type' rifles. I may even seek advice on the subject. I just would never come here and ask for help picking out a "sniper rifle" because I'm not a sniper and I'm not planning on doing any sniping. I also think that anyone that's noticed that the latest attempt at bringing back an even more draconian assault weapons ban is a bipartisan effort in congress would be getting nervous. Well that and the fact that Obama could become friendly with a chicken on the steps of congress and all we'd hear from the media was that it was a yet another sign of his "inclusiveness" and yet another reason to vote for the his Messiahness.
Last edited:
BrunoNorway
New member
i thought a sniper rifle was a rifle you use to hunt snipe. You probertly know that sniping is to hunt snipe, right?
You see how the media can twist two feathers into 14 hens.
You see how the media can twist two feathers into 14 hens.
I have to agree with Sarge. The idiots are gonna call them whatever they want and contort the facts to tell the story they want to tell. We can't walk on eggshells for fear of what they 'might' do or think nor can we let them choose our vocabulary for us.
I do agree, however, that about the only folks in the civilian world that would use the term "sniper rifle" are posers and neophytes who have probably played too many video games.
I do agree, however, that about the only folks in the civilian world that would use the term "sniper rifle" are posers and neophytes who have probably played too many video games.
Kreyzhorse
New member
I agree. My scoped bolt action rifles are just my hunting rifles.
I won't call my SKS an "assault rifle" either. It's a mil-surplus semi auto or my plinker.
I understand that they are just words, but the Brady Campaign has done a good job associating those words to mean something negative and something to be feared. I refuse to call any guns by the names that are currently being demonized.
wncchester
New member
Part of why it's so difficult to discuss many gun related things effectively is the misuse of words so often they lose any specific meaning.
REAL shooters call their rifles what they are, not something else. My target rifles are for targets. My varmit rifles are for varmits. "Sniper" rifles are for killing people at long range and I don't have any of them. The public already suspects that ANY rifle with a scope is a "sniper" rifle and that ANY auto loader is an "assult' rifle. Why can't we at least attempt to clarifiy somo of that by using language correctly?
If we add to the public's confusion of what we are shooting for target or whatever, why should we be surprised when the media mislabels them? Even if I cared to own an AR type, it would be a semi-auto, NOT be an "assault" rife. Unless I just wanted to puff my ego about how tuff I look with it I suppose.
There is a BIG difference between a clip and a removable magazine. Each exists and each has a specific purpose. If I call my magazine a clip, how can I expect YOU or anyone else to know exactly what I mean when I use either word?
My ammunition consists of cartridges, not "bullets". Calling our ammunition "bullets" is not only silly, it further confuses non-shooters. Any cops who might raid my loading room will find tens of thousands of bullets, mostly cast, but only a few hundred cartridges. If the raid was posted on the evening news, I'd like to see them say it correctly but why should TV air heads speak any more clearly that we shooters?
My "gun powder" is a flamable solid, not a dangerous explosive, there is a BIG difference. Just getting that part correct might help us gain a little support from a few of the frightened sheeple.
None of this is a "PC" comment on language, In fact, being technically correct is perhaps directly opposed to "pollitcally correct". PC talk smears the meanings of words so as to confuse or obfuscate the correct meanings so they can indeed be misused. The intellectually sloppy PC point of view needs no extra help from us.
We are involved in a techinical sport with simple and clear word meanings but they only convey such meanings IF and WHEN we, those of us who know better, use them correctly.
REAL shooters call their rifles what they are, not something else. My target rifles are for targets. My varmit rifles are for varmits. "Sniper" rifles are for killing people at long range and I don't have any of them. The public already suspects that ANY rifle with a scope is a "sniper" rifle and that ANY auto loader is an "assult' rifle. Why can't we at least attempt to clarifiy somo of that by using language correctly?
If we add to the public's confusion of what we are shooting for target or whatever, why should we be surprised when the media mislabels them? Even if I cared to own an AR type, it would be a semi-auto, NOT be an "assault" rife. Unless I just wanted to puff my ego about how tuff I look with it I suppose.
There is a BIG difference between a clip and a removable magazine. Each exists and each has a specific purpose. If I call my magazine a clip, how can I expect YOU or anyone else to know exactly what I mean when I use either word?
My ammunition consists of cartridges, not "bullets". Calling our ammunition "bullets" is not only silly, it further confuses non-shooters. Any cops who might raid my loading room will find tens of thousands of bullets, mostly cast, but only a few hundred cartridges. If the raid was posted on the evening news, I'd like to see them say it correctly but why should TV air heads speak any more clearly that we shooters?
My "gun powder" is a flamable solid, not a dangerous explosive, there is a BIG difference. Just getting that part correct might help us gain a little support from a few of the frightened sheeple.
None of this is a "PC" comment on language, In fact, being technically correct is perhaps directly opposed to "pollitcally correct". PC talk smears the meanings of words so as to confuse or obfuscate the correct meanings so they can indeed be misused. The intellectually sloppy PC point of view needs no extra help from us.
We are involved in a techinical sport with simple and clear word meanings but they only convey such meanings IF and WHEN we, those of us who know better, use them correctly.
The facts are that we are in a time when there are a lot of very vocal people who will use anything they can to take our guns. We should be smart enough to use proper terminology and remove their ammo. Snipers are military folk who use precision rifles to kill selected targets. News media calls anyone who randomly shoots at people, cars, or houses "sniper"
Be smart, avoid the use of the term sniper. It will only bring disfavor upon anyone who owns guns.
Be smart, avoid the use of the term sniper. It will only bring disfavor upon anyone who owns guns.
Honestly I think trying to control the way people speak is just an exorcize in self abuse. People come in all levels of sophistication, everything from the very astute, all the way to the guy who was raised and lives out in the middle of nowhere. Then you add to the mix that most people’s lexicon is formed by the media which ranges from MTV to Saturday morning cartoons to movies, to radio to TV news etc. etc. Throw all this together and mix vigorously and we do well to communicate as well as we do. The bottom line is that people are going to talk as well as they know how which very often isn’t especially dazzling. Be that as it may, people are people and that’s what we do, that’s how we are.
The anti’s have an agenda that they are going to peruse by what ever means available. If this means out right lying then that’s what you can expect. If you plan to defeat them then it’s going to have to be some other way besides letting them control the way you speak. At present they control the media and for the most part the universities are nothing more than indoctrination centers for the left ( can you say Communist Party ). This gives them a huge advantage in the struggle. They are already way out front. Frankly I think the only way they will be defeated is to turn popular opinion against them and get things to the point that no matter what altruistic sounding hyperbole comes from their mouth, the public automatically mentally runs the formula: liberal left = evil lies.
Until the public understands the nature of the struggle, the left will win.
There was a movie some time back that had this really great line in it, something like “the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled off was to convince people that he didn’t exist”. Well whether you are inclined to believe in the Devil or not the principal still applies. Until people understand the nature of the battle that is being waged, we lose.
The anti’s have an agenda that they are going to peruse by what ever means available. If this means out right lying then that’s what you can expect. If you plan to defeat them then it’s going to have to be some other way besides letting them control the way you speak. At present they control the media and for the most part the universities are nothing more than indoctrination centers for the left ( can you say Communist Party ). This gives them a huge advantage in the struggle. They are already way out front. Frankly I think the only way they will be defeated is to turn popular opinion against them and get things to the point that no matter what altruistic sounding hyperbole comes from their mouth, the public automatically mentally runs the formula: liberal left = evil lies.
Until the public understands the nature of the struggle, the left will win.
There was a movie some time back that had this really great line in it, something like “the greatest trick the Devil ever pulled off was to convince people that he didn’t exist”. Well whether you are inclined to believe in the Devil or not the principal still applies. Until people understand the nature of the battle that is being waged, we lose.
Not deliberately trying to create a ridiculous tangent, but this jogged the memory, it is sort of a corollary to a broader discussion from some time ago, in terms of technical accuracy, political correct-ness and consequent perceptions:
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283911
http://www.thefiringline.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283911